Bad News for Architects in the next ver. of Google Sketchup

brodie

I can understand Google's decision that they want to "encourage" sales of their Pro version. After all, that's what the SU Team is living on and that's what generates continuous development. They could've disallowed commercial use of the free version again but we know how ineffective that would've been as well as it would've meant some kind of legal limitation again - which seems to be against their overall policy.

Gaieus,

I use SU Pro so this particular change won't affect me. The only thing that worries me a tad is that this wasn't the reason they gave for the change. If they'd come out and said, 'we want to make a bigger gap between free and Pro so that hobbyists will have a great free program but hardcore users will be more encouraged to buy a great cheap modeler. In the future we hope to use this extra revenue to improve development of both the free and Pro versions.' That would have pleased me greatly. I've long hoped for a wider gap between free and Pro (although I was thinking more along the lines of added Pro features, not fewer free features).

However, the way I read the article it sounds more like he's simply saying that 'there's only so much code to go around and with the direction we're taking SU we think colada is more important than dwg.' If that's truly the thinking that seems rather worrisome and wrong headed in my opinion.

-Brodie

Al Hart

Has anyone noticed if text and dimensioning and "orphan" edge lines (often used to draw twigs in trees) are exported to Collada, or is it only 3D?

How about images (rather than textures of faces)

honoluludesktop

JesseJames, I am not a expert, but besides your dislike for ACAD, what is wrong with DXF?

Good points: It is ASCII, thus changeable with a text editor, easy to read, and understand. It creates big files, but not unmanageable by today's standards. The problems with translations have nothing to do with DXF, as one modeler's entities are often another's non-entities. It also has nothing to do with "open", apparently Sony owns "Collada", and maybe elect to "close" it some day, just as ACAD did with DXF. It is also widely used by most Cad applications, and because it has been around for a while, continues to provide access by legacy applications (some of which is not more then 10 years old), and to older databases by new ones.

Bad points: ?????

TIG

It's great that Collada import/export will be fully supported in the next release... but, as has been said if we already have a good working version of the DXF/DWG import/export tools what's the logic in removing them now ? Other than limiting Free users Options and edging them towards Pro ? Free DoubleCAD will probably bridge the gap for free users anyway ? So why appear to be mean ?

jessejames

@honoluludesktop said:

JesseJames, I am not a expert, but besides your dislike for ACAD, what is wrong with DXF?

Hello honolulu, how's the weather?

Putting ACAD's evil world domination aspirations aside, i feel DXF is just an ugly antiquated bloat that needs to go the way of the Dodo bird -- and the quicker the better. ACAD will change if we force them to! But that change will never come from within.

@honoluludesktop said:

Good points: It is ASCII, thus changeable with a text editor, easy to read, and understand.

COLLADA is just an XML file. So you can read and edit it with a standard text editor OR with special "fancy" editors. So COLLDA is DXF without the antiquities, but with a much more intelligent markup structure.

@honoluludesktop said:

It creates big files, but not unmanageable by today's standards.

Yes far too big! But, "?not unmanageable?" as measured by what yardstick? DXF is actually very ugly in a text editor. IMHO. Parsing markup tags is sooo much easier.

@honoluludesktop said:

It also has nothing to do with "open", apparently Sony owns "Collada", and maybe elect to "close" it some day, just as ACAD did with DXF.

You have a point. Sony is no Angel by far! I would like a guaruntee of free-ness from Sony because i have not forgotten about those evil Sony rootkits that plagued the world not so long ago!

I have not read the details of license in full. But i do know that as it stands now, COLLADA is released for commercial and private usage (per the website). I would much like a truley open standard but that can come in due time. First we must ween of the ACAD nipple!

@honoluludesktop said:

It is also widely used by most Cad applications, and because it has been around for a while, continues to provide access by legacy applications (some of which is not more then 10 years old), and to older databases by new ones.

And i fear a thousand more years of ACAD proprietary dictatorship will continue unless the revolutionaries storm the palace and remove the "greedys" from power.

@honoluludesktop said:

Bad points: ?????

not sure? But no system can possibly be perfect. More good than bad i am sure. With COLLADA now i can export to Blender for fancy subsurface/ sculping stuff that SketchUp is not good at and vice-versa!

Sorry if my post seems like a hahaha to ACAD users, that was not my intent. Losing any functionalty as important as Import/Export hurts. But since the free version is primarily geared towards hobbist modelers and GE, i can see the reasoning behind such a move. And i can understand the anger of SU Pro guys when they see a free version that allows such functionality.

kwistenbiebel

@al hart said:

Has anyone noticed if text and dimensioning and "orphan" edge lines (often used to draw twigs in trees) are exported to Collada, or is it only 3D?

Very important question, Al.
I also would like to know.
Without orphan edge lines, importing CAD through Collada is useless.
Most of us import 2D plans and not so much 3D.

Chris Fullmer

Interestingly, the collada format is more versatile than virtually any other 3d format that SU already has. Whether removing dwg is good or bad, I think in the future Google's decision to more fully support collada will prove to be advantageous.

jessejames

It's XML people! just throw some info between <tagname> and </tagname> and whamo! It now supports "tagname's" functionality.

...well that is, as long as the receiver knows what to do with the extra info.

If you want to see it first hand, draw some geometry in SketchUp and export as kmz. Then rename the file to zip and open the .dae file in a text editor. Beautiful! Makes DXF look like lipstick on a pig

Al Hart

@jessejames said:

If you want to see it first hand, draw some geometry in SketchUp and export as kmz. Then rename the file to zip and open the .dae file in a text editor. Beautiful! Makes DXF look like lipstick on a pig

I took a model, exported it as .KMZ and them imported it.

Here is what I got.

honoluludesktop

JesseJames, Aside from your use of colorful adjectives, your post was informative, and reasonable. Thanks:-)

Just keep in mind that a lot of us depend on DXF. Some, have no other reasonable option

Gaieus

@al hart said:

Has anyone noticed if text and dimensioning and "orphan" edge lines (often used to draw twigs in trees) are exported to Collada, or is it only 3D?

How about images (rather than textures of faces)

It's been around for a while; standalone edges now export to collada. The decision was made in order to let people model say cable supported bridges for GE without unnecessary extra geometry (faces) added.

Jesse - yes, your reasoning is correct. Probably some kind of "company policy" (breaking ACAD monopoly( is also behind the curtains.

I wasn1t "repeating" any official Google opinion however just trying to think aloud and understand some background considerations, too.

jessejames

@honoluludesktop said:

Just keep in mind that a lot of us depend on DXF. Some, have no other reasonable option

Yikes i feel really bad now

In an effort to relate to the loss of DXF i imagined for a second (and only a second!) that scripting or some other functionality that was important to me where removed and ouch i am very hurt and angry now! Google, you really know how to put the hooks in us don't you! But at least you give instead of take, take, take -- like you know who!

Please understand Honolulu that my beef is with proprietary formats that have been shoved down our throats for years now by M$, ACAD, and the other greed mongering corporations out there who's evil empire aspirations make my head spin around in circles whilst spiting pea soup!

And my happiness is only in the fact that we will now get a true "modelers" file type for Import/Export of SU files. Sadly though at great loss to many among us!

But now i can feel the damage that you must be feeling. What could be next? Scripting? Printing? Reduced Functionality? I understand the financial reasons but...???

The only way to fix this whole conundrum would be to OpenSource SketchUp. But alas, that is but the pipe dream of fools. This software is sadly too revolutionary for open source.

If we could only find a way for Google to profit from this app then maybe...?

ahh rats, life stinks!

linea

@unknownuser said:

'we want to make a bigger gap between free and Pro so that hobbyists will have a great free program but hardcore users will be more encouraged to buy a great cheap modeler. In the future we hope to use this extra revenue to improve development of both the free and Pro versions.'

That should be carved in stone and mounted above the main entrance at the Googleplex.

pbacot

@jessejames said:

my beef is with proprietary formats that have been shoved down our throats for years now by M$, ACAD, and the other greed mongering corporations out there who's evil empire aspirations make my head spin around in circles whilst spiting pea soup!

Having been engaged with a Mac drafting software forever, I know about trying to work with the "proprietary" formats. I think you may relax some!

AutoDesk developed DWG and DXF for use in their software. Other developers have to make translators with mixed success for these formats because AutoCAD is so popular and successful, us users of "other" software need to be able to share files with AutoCAD users in order to do business. It's usually these users who assume you'll provide a DWG file etc. if you wish to collaborate with them.

I don't think, I don't really know, if Collada can aspire to provide the same sort of interchange for CAD but isn't that up to "us", and not AutoDesk, if we want an open source file exchange format that can handle the needs of CAD (or modeling) exchange?

Autodesk does make software that drives the industry forward (perhaps they also greedily consume other perfectly good software). I happen not to use their flagship AutoCAD, but I don't blame them for being successful.

Sorry for the run-on sentences.

brodie

@linea said:

@unknownuser said:

'we want to make a bigger gap between free and Pro so that hobbyists will have a great free program but hardcore users will be more encouraged to buy a great cheap modeler. In the future we hope to use this extra revenue to improve development of both the free and Pro versions.'

That should be carved in stone and mounted above the main entrance at the Googleplex.

haha, I'd spring for the stone masons.

-brodie

dacad

Well i get back fom vacantion, came to my favorite forum, and i find this news about sketchup, and what a news about sketchup in many diferent levels!! Well after reading the original post from google and every post in here this is my toughts on this matter:

There's a good side and a bad side in this. The good is that first Google is talking to us!! i still can't believe it but it seems true. And other good thing is a promissed better collada export, and many may see these not worthing much but, believe me, this will be great in the future. An open format that anyone can use, that right now just needs a good vehicle to spread fast, and sketchup it's perfect for that.

But there's a dark side to this news: Removing features it's never good, be it in a paid or free aplication and will always bring the argument of "it's free so don't complaint" and that's never a good argument if you want to keep a good user base. Other thing to take notice is that if this collada importer/exporter is coming as good as the others importers then i wouldn't brag about it...SK has not one single importer for 3d models that work as it should specially in large or complex models. They always lose uv coordinates specially with unwarped meshs, or parts of the model go missing or completly loses materials, so before i see it working i won't stand by it.

Conclusion: I'm very surprised in a good way by these move, is good to see they're trying to change and comunicate with us even if it's bad news (and keep in mind that i'm one of the biggest critis of SK7...). I also agree that the gap between the Free and Pro version should be clear and these change will help on that, and these proves what i have already said about the free beeing the biggest rival of the Pro (and i use SK free right now) but it will be a "cold day in hell" if they're hoping to see 500$ from me for importers (there's companys selling plugins with importers for sketchup at 25-50$). So i would like to see "real" features first, and in sketchup, NOT layout, NOT style builder, JUST sketchup. Because the worst thing they can do right now that they have a lot of users felling "betrayed" (i'm one...) is starting a hype about a new version that in the end will not deliver...again, and i seryously doubt that these time would survive without damage for them

The Odd thing about this: Just for curiosity how will people develope their models to google earth without some basic plans? i'm suspecting they start with some basic plan from a dwg import.(i really don't know because i always wonder why would people work for free for helping a multi milion dollar company making more money enhancing there products...).Strange that these decision may bite them back in the end if they're not carefull.

In the end i can say i really like and understand their decision, and BTW i'm an architect (but that also does some design, and 3d visualition).
Sorry the long text (if someone reads it )

David

brodie

Well I read it DacaD

I'd have to say I agree with a lot of what you mention. In particular I think it'll be interesting to see how the Pro users react to the next version. SU7 was certainly a disappointing release for me. In my arch-viz work I haven't found any place in my workflow for the tools that SU7 brought about. Even though my company foots the bill, I'm sure I'll be more hesitant whenever SU8 comes around.

I think it's an interesting comment regarding google earth as well. I can't see how this sort of change wouldn't put a damper on that project. Many of the models are made by city planners and architects but many of them are made by bored teenagers with little to do until the next Halo game comes out. Like you I'm not quite sure what the point is aside from shear novelty. By the time they've got the whole world in low poly boxes with low res textures someone will figure out a way to attach some super scanner onto a satilite and scan the whole darn world in a day.

-Brodie